02/05/2016 - Feedback Request War Server Safe Zone Removal

[Xsyon]

A proposal has been made that safe zones on the War Server be removed automatically once a tribe hits 5 members.

Would you like to see this in game?

Would you like to see a variation of this? For example:

- tribes can allow / disallow PvP with a switch
- only in medium or high danger zones
- any other simple variations you'd like to see?

I encourage all War Server players to participate in this poll.

Thanks!

[millsdo]

I like the idea!

5 members and above is good.
I think if you are turning it off you are turning it off. Don't have a switch.

So, turn it off for tribes of 5 or larger no matter the zone.

Leave it off for tribes of 4 or less.

[Ooloo]

Safe zone as in your own tribe?...allowing anyone that can get into your tribe to gank or greif? No thank you

I/we, worked hard to get the gear we have and also dont like towering fortress walls.

[KeithStone]

A switch to turn off would defeat the purpose in my opinion without an incentive to leave it on.

I understand there will be the ability later on that will let tribes set a territory they control to OFF, but there's also an incentive to keep it on.

[Whorlok]

i think if we have territorys to fight ist enough...The home base is a safe Zone where any Player can Relaxing from pvp but with the amount to Switch ON or OFF.
A nice Thing what we must have is a Battlefieldmap in game.if a tribe is Building a Territorytotem in a Zone example: if variable" A Better Tomorrow" Territorytotem is Building THEN Switch in MAP Zone 700 to Color which the tribe have settled in the territory totem. and other info:
-TIME of Building
- DATE if we can attack this
- TRIBENAME
- 2 COLORS can we Setting for the two armys
- and the momentualy amount of REWARDS in the Totem bascet where each tribe can settle by placing those TERRITORYTOTEM.. example: My idea with Territorytotem (ist a Multi totem where we can also can settle for Player Events)


and eventuely Statistic : how many territorys have a tribe captured/lost last week/Month/all TIME,Rewards earned last week/month/all the TIME and so on.

[xyberviri]

I vote: No safe zones for Tribes with 5+ members in Medium or Higher Danger zones. Tribes can stay down by the lake if they don't like it, that can be the switch.

[MrDDT]

Remove all safe zones of 5+ member tribes. Walls are your safety. Until people can break through walls you are safe anyways.

[xyberviri]

I really like the idea the conflict zones idea, the removal of the totem protection in medium or higher areas would give the tribes reason to want those conflict zones.





We can simplify that idea by having all High+ Danger zones be available for conquest totems, Connect the upkeep cost of the conquest totems to the number of total conquest totems globally. Let the controlling tribe flip the zone to +resources or +safezone.




DONE, we basically have a game of advance and secure at this point and players that basically only want something to fight can fight over what zones offer more protection or resources. As more and more players or zones fall under conquest the cost should increase, resulting in more things and work for players to do.

Then Ooloo and Whorlok can work towards protecting the zone they live in by participating in the conquest idea.

[ilius]

Don't think removing safe zones will attract more people to PvP server. Better add safe zones to all low lvl sectors...

[xyberviri]

Better add safe zones to all low lvl sectors...
please read over the thread here: http://www.xsyon.com/showthread.php/9531-01-25-2016-Feedback-Request-War-Server-Proposal

Specifically this part:


Potential Future Enhancements:
- On top of the controlled territories: High danger zones could be full loot PvP with slightly higher resource bonuses, medium danger zones could be random loot PvP with no resource bonuses and low danger zones could be no PvPand no resource bonuses (or the same as medium danger zones).

I vote for that with the idea of no safe zones in medium or higher for bands+.
(I also vote for all high zones to just be the conflict zones that can be flipped to safe from)


The fear of loosing all the PvP zones shouldn't be an issue, there already is no PvP. Just leave medium zones alone and there will always be some pvp between the high and low zones.


How many people have see how many hours others have wasted in Arma on all those territory control missions? that alone is interesting for people.

[KeithStone]

Don't think removing safe zones will attract more people to PvP server. Better add safe zones to all low lvl sectors...

There is a full blown plan for the WAR server that's going to take months of coding and that's after the month(s) of current coding that's being done for other features.

The goal here is to keep it simple and give us something that resembles more of what it means to be on a war server that can be put in until the full system gets completed.

The PVE server is 100% safe everywhere, if that's what you want then go there.

The PVP server (for the few of us playing it) needs some action and we want the feeling that things matter, like the need to get our walls built.

[Pauven]

I'd prefer an on/off switch, but the off state would need an incentive. I think the switch should also exist for smaller tribes, but only after a certain amount of time.

[ilius]

There is a full blown plan for the WAR server that's going to take months of coding and that's after the month(s) of current coding that's being done for other features.

The goal here is to keep it simple and give us something that resembles more of what it means to be on a war server that can be put in until the full system gets completed.

The PVE server is 100% safe everywhere, if that's what you want then go there.

The PVP server (for the few of us playing it) needs some action and we want the feeling that things matter, like the need to get our walls built.

I actually voted yes for this feature. And I only play on PvP. We need people to have some action.
Actually I dont think removing/leaving safe zones on tribal land makes much of a difference right now. But for some future plans maybe. Just wanted to say that its not worth an effort right now. Again its just how I feel.

[mush]

A proposal has been made that safe zones on the War Server be removed automatically once a tribe hits 5 members.

Would you like to see this in game?

Would you like to see a variation of this? For example:

- tribes can allow / disallow PvP with a switch
- only in medium or high danger zones
- any other simple variations you'd like to see?

I encourage all War Server players to participate in this poll.

Thanks!

Can you clarify the following?

1 - Is this something you are looking to add now - until you develop the other PvP changes or would this be part of those.
2 - If a tribe area isnt safe i assume all baskets/carts/buildings etc will be accessible to anyone entering the tribe area?
3 - By having it auto switch to PvP after 5 members whats to stop large tribes just setting up a 1 man totem and putting all the valuable stuff in there in total safety from raiding.

[Hero]

Only useful if players and map is reset on pvp FIRST, or i for one will just go back to homestead each for me an friends, players on the server have had bugs an glitches to take advantage of, macroed etc.
A wipe is needed before pvp can be taken seriously.
Its obvious one of the 200-300+hp vet pkers requested this the same guys that used to make the one server a gank fest ages ago an had people quitting all over the place.
Wipe/Reset, characters to, at best allow us to keep the BPs nothing else even those i can live without.

[Hero]

Also Tribe alignment should effect which other tribes you can trade with and pking unarmed people or something similar should auto you to a certain alignment so at least being a douche has repercussions, people in rl can be pvped but it does not mean we just go around killing who we like, there are consequences.
If all u want is pvp no building, skills etc try happy wars -.-
If idiots can just roam about with no regulation or consequence to being a tool, trade will suffer and many other game mechanics as no one will leave tribe land (the prob atm and why).

[Hero]

I encourage all War Server players to participate in this poll.

Thanks!

I also hope these so called polls take into account people with alt accounts voting 3+ times on a poll with only 18 vote is quite an unfair advantage....

[xyberviri]

Make sure you read the thread over at http://www.xsyon.com/showthread.php/9531-01-25-2016-Feedback-Request-War-Server-Proposal

With that thread in mind, with one possible implementation being low danger zones being pve only, which means you wont have that gank fest you had when the server split happen.

[MrDDT]

Also Tribe alignment should effect which other tribes you can trade with and pking unarmed people or something similar should auto you to a certain alignment so at least being a douche has repercussions, people in rl can be pvped but it does not mean we just go around killing who we like, there are consequences.
If all u want is pvp no building, skills etc try happy wars -.-
If idiots can just roam about with no regulation or consequence to being a tool, trade will suffer and many other game mechanics as no one will leave tribe land (the prob atm and why).


I think until an alignment system is fleshed out, it shouldn't be in place. Because you would want it so people can't change it easy. Also need to think of making it balanced. Evil people should not be rewarded for being Evil but there should be some benefits to it, as well as for being Neutral or Good.

If tribal lands are not safe, why would people care to leave them or not?
No system will stop people from being a douche and no system will punish people from being a douche. No matter what laws/rules you have in place you can not stop this, you can only limit it or encourage it. Punishing people because someone could be a douche is not a good option for me. Meaning setting a limit because a few people might be a douche.

I like EVE style trading however, it took a LOT of work to get that system in place. I would love to see it be fully into place of a regional trade good system. Where prices for items are high in some places far away from where they are gathered. This creates a need to trade items around the map, yet not stop people from being bandits to get money/goods from traders/transporters. Getting that system in place might take a lot of balancing though, and removing of bugs for exploits.

[Xsyon]

1 - Is this something you are looking to add now - until you develop the other PvP changes or would this be part of those.This would be something added now and removed when the full proposed PvP system is implemented.


2 - If a tribe area isnt safe i assume all baskets/carts/buildings etc will be accessible to anyone entering the tribe area? No. Everything would still be safe. The only difference is that players would be able to fight on tribe land.


3 - By having it auto switch to PvP after 5 members whats to stop large tribes just setting up a 1 man totem and putting all the valuable stuff in there in total safety from raiding.It really wouldn't matter since everything would be safe. It would probably discourage some players from growing past 5 members though.

This thread was posted in response to a suggestion made here (http://www.xsyon.com/project.php?issueid=2367)

The idea would be to implement something quick, easy and temporary to encourage more PvP on the War Server. It won't grow into something more complex.

My personal thought is that this change:
- Would not attract new players.
- May bring back some old players (if current players spread the word).
- May encourage some current players to be more active.
- May cause some current players to stop playing or reduce their tribe size.

Overall I don't think it would have a great effect either way. I'm open to whatever you players want on this!

I'd like to see more votes and feedback before making a decision and I am taking into account players voting from multiple accounts.

Thanks!

[MrDDT]

To me this temp change would not do much until the rest of the PVP stuff is in. People need something to fight for, opening up PVP on tribal lands does not accomplish this. But it's good to see some of the early issues with PVP on tribal lands on. This could be a good balance check to issues later before war issues.

[mush]

Ok, so majority of players will just end up walking off there tribezones, therefore pretty much removing what has been added.

Only new players won't be walled of so will remain at 4 until walled of then increase tribe size when safe.

For me I don't think this addition will help entourage good PvP. May aswell just wait.

[MrDDT]

Ok, so majority of players will just end up walking off there tribezones, therefore pretty much removing what has been added.

Only new players won't be walled of so will remain at 4 until walled of then increase tribe size when safe.

For me I don't think this addition will help entourage good PvP. May aswell just wait.

Why I say don't wait is because it can show possible issues/exploits with the system. Like people bypassing walls using "tricks". Then it can be fixed without having to do it in the middle of 100 other fixes and issues.

I would rather find out about it when I can only be killed in my tribal area than find out about it when all items are fully lootable bins and killing me and other issues like stat loss on death. Find out more now with controlled issues.

[KeithStone]

Ok, so majority of players will just end up walking off there tribezones, therefore pretty much removing what has been added.

Only new players won't be walled of so will remain at 4 until walled of then increase tribe size when safe.

For me I don't think this addition will help entourage good PvP. May aswell just wait.

Once the walls go up and you get switched over to PVP you can chase somebody back to their tribe land and get through their door before they have a chance to close it.

It could be a lot of fun!

Also, as DDT say's, this could help find exploits because players will be more motivated (not saying they should do this, just saying it will happen) to try and glitch through walls just to get in to kill you.

We can find these bugs now instead of later when the better system get's put in.

[Sammie]

Hello well I solo but have lot of account So it just 1 player in tribe Am ok whit switch on or off

[xyberviri]

Once the walls go up and you get switched over to PVP you can chase somebody back to their tribe land and get through their door before they have a chance to close it.

Anyone play on a un-modded rust server? (or one with out the auto door close script)

This is basically what you do OR C4 doors to get into bases.

Apart from building thats all you do in rust and that player base is going strong.

[rosedrake]

perhaps with incentives for your tribe if you switch protection off?

i am and always will be pve in sandbox games like this, where you make and build things, but i've played and enjoyed competitive games too - perhaps if you switch protection off in your tribe you get combat bonuses in it, which i think would make sense because the playing field is your own home vs the attackers who are newcomers.

it will create an interesting scenario where, in exchange for being prone to attacks, you have a higher chance of successfully defending, which gives you reward in the form of loot from the attackers killed. and the ability to switch protection back on for when most of the tribe members go offline. because then it's an unfair fight. and hardcore game rule #1 is if its not fair it isnt fun.

[Ooloo]

Hi...

Rosedrake puts up a good point to have a tribe bonus if switched off...but may i add that to have that bonus your upkeep must be maintained or even a seperate upkeep for possible pvp...say blood offerings from a kill.

Mookie

[MrDDT]

perhaps with incentives for your tribe if you switch protection off?

i am and always will be pve in sandbox games like this, where you make and build things, but i've played and enjoyed competitive games too - perhaps if you switch protection off in your tribe you get combat bonuses in it, which i think would make sense because the playing field is your own home vs the attackers who are newcomers.

it will create an interesting scenario where, in exchange for being prone to attacks, you have a higher chance of successfully defending, which gives you reward in the form of loot from the attackers killed. and the ability to switch protection back on for when most of the tribe members go offline. because then it's an unfair fight. and hardcore game rule #1 is if its not fair it isnt fun.

Isn't respawning at the battle front already a huge bonus? If you die, you can respawn at the battle front. You also have access to food and resupplies.
I understand if you are talking about a 1 v 1 fight. But someone trying to kill you and loot you would have to also get away with the loot.
Likely they would have to fight you and your tribe members and it would be very hard to get away with the loot.

In my opinion if there is another bonus for your own tribe lands fighting it should be relatively small.


The other problem I have with "switches" is the fact people will abuse them. How would you like it someone setting up a command post of resupplies and drop off for attacking your base that you can't do anything about and can't kill them once they cross the line into their tribal area? You think it won't happen? I promise you it will, all the time. The bonus would have to be so great that people are pretty much forced to turn it off, but still after that point why have the switch option at all?

[rosedrake]

@MrDDT: respawn timer should be longer when there are intruders. losing condition being having everyone dead so the intruders are free to loot things and flee before tribe members respawn.

same with switching too, give it a timer, or make it unswitchable until tribe area is clear of intruders.

[xyberviri]

I really dislike the idea of a switch that players can at will flip pvp on or off in a specific location.

If you make zone lines the switch, everyone has a mini map, everyone can see when they are slowly approaching a border, you understand what terrain looks like and where the boundaries are.

Id' honestly like pvp protection to just drop completely after the totem has been up for a week with pvp disallowed in low danger areas. Then we dont have any rules or guide lines other than: "look there is the pvp line if you cross it you pvp, if you dont... then you dont pvp"

If its regional people can simply not cross a line to not participate.








The reason i keep suggesting "NO PvP in low danger areas" in almost every other post is because its not really "low" danger and there is almost Never any no good pvp ever happening in low danger areas that isn't really just greifing and ganking people. Or specifically targeted at noobs.

[MrDDT]

@MrDDT: respawn timer should be longer when there are intruders. losing condition being having everyone dead so the intruders are free to loot things and flee before tribe members respawn.

same with switching too, give it a timer, or make it unswitchable until tribe area is clear of intruders.

I'm not sure that is the answer either, surely we should give some advantage to the defenders haha.



I really dislike the idea of a switch that players can at will flip pvp on or off in a specific location.

If you make zone lines the switch, everyone has a mini map, everyone can see when they are slowly approaching a border, you understand what terrain looks like and where the boundaries are.

Id' honestly like pvp protection to just drop completely after the totem has been up for a week with pvp disallowed in low danger areas. Then we dont have any rules or guide lines other than: "look there is the pvp line if you cross it you pvp, if you dont... then you dont pvp"

If its regional people can simply not cross a line to not participate.



The reason i keep suggesting "NO PvP in low danger areas" in almost every other post is because its not really "low" danger and there is almost Never any no good pvp ever happening in low danger areas that isn't really just greifing and ganking people. Or specifically targeted at noobs.


I do like areas of the map set for PVP and other areas for set for Non PVP, being that it's the PVP server there should be large bonuses for being a tribe in a PVP area. There also should be a no building zone buffer between the areas, with no bonuses. This will help prevent buffer tribes from reaping the rewards of PVP area without being at risk.
Problem I see with that system (which I still should be done) is the fact tribes already have built in parts of the map already. I do think that you will find that these tribes likely will not mind being changed to PVP zones IF the bonus was great and if the system were to be put in place and supported.

Xyberviri, reason I do not like the 1 week (7 days) timer is because people again can use it for griefing. Think about it. You have 7 days of safety totems (which are free to build) and attack another tribe who is not protected. I just feel like it will be highly abused in this system.
I believe at the very least doing this system, totems need to have a small timer of attackble BEFORE they offer protection so a tribe can stop people from building right next to you and abusing the system. Also totems NEED to not be free to place anymore. It makes no sense that people can drop a totem for free. They offer a great amount of protection and exploiting options when they are free with a small timer to replace. This needs to be fixed no matter what choice is done.

[xyberviri]

Yeah that true, unfortunately players, being the bastards we are, are going to exploit any type of grace protection.

then really the whole totem needs to be changed to just something that has to be built, ie not instant drop

[Taraniel]

If the elimination of safe zones is being considered, then tribal leaders should have a say on the ruleset for their own tribal lands. The war server will have plenty of fighting zones. As far as I can see, the war server population is growing and becoming healthy again. Don't kill it. Totally removing safe zones will do that and there will be complaining ad nauseum again over the fact that its an empty server. Just my 2 cents on the subject.

[MrDDT]

If the elimination of safe zones is being considered, then tribal leaders should have a say on the ruleset for their own tribal lands. The war server will have plenty of fighting zones. As far as I can see, the war server population is growing and becoming healthy again. Don't kill it. Totally removing safe zones will do that and there will be complaining ad nauseum again over the fact that its an empty server. Just my 2 cents on the subject.

Removing of safe zones sounds stronger than it is, do not forget that only unprotected lands by walls etc would be unsafe. If you have walls or terraformed walls you can't effectively be attacked.
Most tribes I know first thing they do is build walls. Once the bugs/exploits are removed/fixed then tribal lands will be very safe.

[Xsyon]

I'm going to close this thread.

There's not enough current interest in removing the safe zones as proposed. There is more interested in a safe zone switch but I don't think it's worth while as an interim system while I implement the changes proposed in the other thread. For now the server will stay as is.

Thanks to everyone that voted!